The U.S. is considering whether to adopt a digital version of its currency

[poochyena]

2 hours ago, Sauron said:

Yeah, laws exist and companies need to abide by them. Go figure.

Porn is legal, but they refuse to process payments involving porn.

[Sauron]

5 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Porn is legal, but they refuse to process payments involving porn.

As far as I know this was only in connection to pornhub specifically being accused of (and later pretty much admitting to) hosting illegal child pornography. Incidentally this is another thing crypto is infamously used for...

 

Don't get me wrong, companies like VISA are far from perfect but crypto is hardly an improvement.

[poochyena]

53 minutes ago, Sauron said:

As far as I know this was only in connection to pornhub specifically

No. Read the ToS of literally any major card processor. They do not allow you to use them if you sell anything porn/sex related.
"For nearly a decade, PayPal, JPMorgan Chase, Visa/MasterCard, and now Square, have systematically denied or closed accounts of small businesses, artists and independent contractors whose business happens to be about sex." (2015)
https://www.engadget.com/2015-12-02-paypal-square-and-big-bankings-war-on-the-sex-industry.html

I sell products on shopify and they allow you to sell porn or sex related product, but do NOT allow you to use their card processor, you have to use a 3rd party tool with higher fees.

[Kisai]

2 hours ago, poochyena said:

No. Read the ToS of literally any major card processor. They do not allow you to use them if you sell anything porn/sex related.
"For nearly a decade, PayPal, JPMorgan Chase, Visa/MasterCard, and now Square, have systematically denied or closed accounts of small businesses, artists and independent contractors whose business happens to be about sex." (2015)
https://www.engadget.com/2015-12-02-paypal-square-and-big-bankings-war-on-the-sex-industry.html

I sell products on shopify and they allow you to sell porn or sex related product, but do NOT allow you to use their card processor, you have to use a 3rd party tool with higher fees.

 

And sites that host legal porn, often get asked why they don't accept paypal, or why they can't pay at all, and that's because the payment processor doesn't want to accept the fraud risk. The payment processor might take a larger 12% cut vs the more typical 3%, but they also refuse to allow 75% of the world to even make a payment.

 

Same sites get asked to accept crypto basically as a last-resort, and the policy tends to be "would rather not have to hold any balance that could be worthless tomorrow". The site can't pay their content creators in crypto either for the exact same reason.

 

Like for the last 25 years, companies have been doing rugpulls of some shape or form where anyone who doesn't accrue a $100USD balance, never gets paid. That could be ad revenue, that could selling pdf's and clipart, that could be selling comics and music. Ultimately the problem isn't the distribution, it's the complexity of paying people who have no means of being paid because of laws and service agreements that target "any porn" instead of just "porn made without the subjects consent"/"erotic materials that violate the indecency laws(that themselves were made for safety reasons, not moral reasons.)"

 

For the same reason Youtube shouldn't be paying adults to harm kids and animals, payment systems shouldn't be paying people producing porn that involves those that can not consent, and that causes mental or physical harm to the subject. Yet... a lot of this stuff does exist, is easy to acquire, just not in the US and Canada which have rather contradictory rules. Yet hate-related materials tends to be mailed and purchased without anyone even blinking.

 

You see the problem here right? It's basically a question of "should the state be prohibiting anything, no matter how distasteful it is? (free speech issue)" Because it's a lot easier to just target the payment systems, who if they want to continue to operate and be insured by FDIC, will have pressure put on them by the most ass-backwards state they're operating in.

 

[Unclescar]

On 2/15/2022 at 4:34 PM, poochyena said:

This has yet to be proven any more likely in a cash free future.

Lol didn't Canada just shut down their banks at the request of the government to stop people from making perfectly legal purchases that the govt didn't like?
Have you not noticed people had their bank accounts closed on them over the last few years because they did not tow the propaganda line?

Cash is the method of finances that you can have complete control over and purchase anonymously. I recognize no argument to take that away from other people as legitimate.

 

8 hours ago, poochyena said:

I, currently, have little reason to use cash.

yay great for you, so speak for yourself and stop acting like you assume everyone else similarly has little reason to use cash.

[poochyena]

42 minutes ago, Unclescar said:

Lol didn't Canada just shut down their banks at the request of the government to stop people from making perfectly legal purchases that the govt didn't like?
Have you not noticed people had their bank accounts closed on them over the last few years because they did not tow the propaganda line?

Cash is the method of finances that you can have complete control over and purchase anonymously. I recognize no argument to take that away from other people as legitimate.

I don't get why people keep saying this. The government can take your cash, just like they can take control of your bank.
You can purchase undeclared items in both cash AND digital currency.

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, Unclescar said:

Lol didn't Canada just shut down their banks at the request of the government to stop people from making perfectly legal purchases that the govt didn't like?

No they didn't. They tightened up the rules regarding crowdfunding because you don't want a foreign power influencing domestic terrorism. And before you "but", do realize that crippling a city isn't peaceful by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Flip this around, would you want Russia and China funding every "break up America" crowdfunding campaign? Because that's basically why you don't want political causes to be eligible for crowdfunding. You don't want a political cause to be instigated and owned by a foreign power.

 

[mr moose]

21 hours ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

You'll be waiting a long time, nocoiner.

Thanks to lack of regulation, cryptos like ETH and BTC allow wealth transfer from poor->rich, and have extreme inequality. 
Gini coefficient measures inequality. 0.0 means everyone is the same. 1.0 means one player has everything.
Germany: 0.31 (somewhat fair with strong support for working class)
USA: 0.48 (deeply unequal)
North Korea: between 0.6 and 0.8 (indentured servitude)
BTC and ETH have about 0.8
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoins-one-percent-controls-lions-share-of-the-cryptocurrencys-wealth-11639996204?redirect=amp

If the world transitioned to crypto, inequality would be increased such that our civilization might regress to slavery. If you are rich, and want to get richer at a faster rate than the current economy allows, then, crypto IS an optimal tool. Crypto is designed from the ground up to favour early adopters and market manipulation.

Great points, I use the Gini coefficient when explaining to parents and schools why some none school activities are better in some areas than others (as it correlates to quite a few social quality aspects).  Town A has a struggling football club but town B only 10K away has a massive one.   When people stop and take a minute to look at the realities of the environment it becomes quite obvious.

 

21 hours ago, IPD said:

Crypto has the additional benefit of apparently being a bit more immune to draconian shutdown measures of conventional funding sites like "kickstarter" and "gofundme".  Not that canadian truckers have anything to say about that...

I agree with the sentiment, however kickstarter and gofundme can only stop payments because they go through their system.  So if crypto was part of their system then they could stop that too.   Just like we see some exchanges pause trading for a myriad of reasons (not the least of which is because some went missing).

[IPD]

13 hours ago, Sauron said:

As far as I know this was only in connection to pornhub specifically being accused of (and later pretty much admitting to) hosting illegal child pornography. Incidentally this is another thing crypto is infamously used for...

 

Don't get me wrong, companies like VISA are far from perfect but crypto is hardly an improvement.

So now you have martial law being used to justify and sanction financial crackdown--happening as we speak.

 

16 hours ago, Sauron said:

You can literally go out and make your own today. Just don't complain if you get charged with money laundering because you didn't check on what your platform was being used to "fund".

Yeah, laws exist and companies need to abide by them. Go figure.

 

Personally, I feel that crowd-funding sites have a similar issue to social media, in the "does section 230 apply or not"?    Nor do I feel that it should even be up for consideration for a crowd-funding site to be considered complicit in money laundering.  Required to provide information on specific donors and recipients with a court order?  Ok, sure.  Then go after those individual parties.  But the site itself should not be held culpable.  Nor should VISA or similar be allowed to hold sway over what they will or will not allow you to spend YOUR OWN MONEY on.

[IPD]

7 hours ago, Kisai said:

No they didn't. They tightened up the rules regarding crowdfunding because you don't want a foreign power influencing domestic terrorism. And before you "but", do realize that crippling a city isn't peaceful by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Flip this around, would you want Russia and China funding every "break up America" crowdfunding campaign? Because that's basically why you don't want political causes to be eligible for crowdfunding. You don't want a political cause to be instigated and owned by a foreign power.

 

The issue with this defense, is that it is up to those in power to determine what constitutes "domestic terrorism".

 

You 100% want political causes to be eligible for crowdfunding.  The ones that are clearly a "threat", can and should be smitten by a legal court order; something that should only happen with separation of powers and the judicial not being beholden to the executive.  But the carte-blanche approach means that you have draconian authority to suppress all opposition--even legal opposition--to your own power.  That's something to be expected from a tin-pot dictator, not a paragon of western democracy.

[Sauron]

33 minutes ago, IPD said:

So now you have martial law being used to justify and sanction financial crackdown--happening as we speak.

I don't see the connection with crypto.

34 minutes ago, IPD said:

"does section 230 apply or not"?

Not every country has the same laws, you know...

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, IPD said:

The issue with this defense, is that it is up to those in power to determine what constitutes "domestic terrorism".

 

Oh gee, a bunch of people waving hate flags among a bunch of others armed with weapons. Looks like terrorism to me.

 

Blocking access to a city, and blocking access to a border crossing? If that was done by the military that would be an act of war. Terrorizing the residents by making noise constantly, that's the very definition of terrorism.

 

 

1 hour ago, IPD said:

You 100% want political causes to be eligible for crowdfunding.

No you don't. Because then your crowdfunding platform becomes a means of overthrowing democratically elected governments funded by dictatorships in neighboring countries.

 

 

1 hour ago, IPD said:

  The ones that are clearly a "threat", can and should be smitten by a legal court order; something that should only happen with separation of powers and the judicial not being beholden to the executive.  But the carte-blanche approach means that you have draconian authority to suppress all opposition--even legal opposition--to your own power.  That's something to be expected from a tin-pot dictator, not a paragon of western democracy.

 

Maybe read their terms of service.

Quote

A.not to use the Services to raise funds or establish or contribute to any Fundraiser with the implicit or explicit purpose of promoting or involving:

1. 1. the violation of any law, regulation, industry requirement, or third-party guidelines or agreements by which you are bound, including those of payment card providers and transaction processors that you utilize in connection with the Services;
   2. any election campaigns that are not run by a registered organization within the supported country;
   3. User Content or Fundraisers that are fraudulent, misleading, inaccurate, dishonest, or impossible;
   4. drugs, narcotics, steroids, controlled substances, pharmaceuticals or similar products or therapies that are either illegal, prohibited, or enjoined by an applicable regulatory body; legal substances that provide the same effect as an illegal drug; or other products, medical practices, or any related equipment or paraphernalia that have been found by an applicable regulatory body to cause consumer harm;
   5. knives, explosives, ammunition, firearms, or other weaponry or accessories;
   6. annuities, investments, loans, equity or lottery contracts, lay-away systems, off-shore banking or similar transactions, money service businesses (including currency exchanges, check cashing or the like), pyramid schemes, “get rich quick schemes” (i.e., Investment opportunities or other services that promise high rewards), network marketing and referral marketing programs, debt collection or crypto-currencies;
   7. gambling, gaming and/or any other activity with an entry fee and a prize, including, but not limited to raffles, casino games, sports betting, fantasy sports, horse or greyhound racing, lottery tickets, raffle tickets, auctions and other ventures that facilitate gambling, games of skill or chance (whether or not it is legally defined as a lottery), Promotions involving monetary rewards, including gift cards, or sweepstakes;
   8. User Content that reflects or promotes behavior that we deem, in our sole discretion, to be an abuse of power or in support of hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, serious disabilities or diseases;
   9. the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, serious disabilities or diseases, financial crimes or crimes of deception;
   10. activities with, in, or involving countries, regions, governments, persons, or entities that are subject to U.S. and other economic sanctions under applicable law, unless such activities are expressly authorized by the appropriate governmental authority;
   11. the funding of a ransom, human trafficking or exploitation, vigilantism, bribes or bounty;
   12. pornography or other sexual content;
   13. offensive, graphic, perverse or sensitive content;
   14. the collecting of payments on behalf of merchants by Payment Processors or otherwise; including but not limited to self-payments on Fundraisers or an attempt to bypass or otherwise circumvent the designated method of payment as provided by GoFundMe;
   15. credit repair or debt settlement services;
   16. the receipt or grant of cash advances or lines of credit to yourself or to another person for purposes other than those purposes clearly stated in the Fundraiser;
   17. publication of User Content (such as mug shots), where we deem, in our sole discretion, that the primary purpose of posting such User Content is to cause reputational harm;
   18. the sale or resale of a good or service;
   19. the aggregation of funds owed to third parties, factoring, or other activities intended to obfuscate the origin of funds;
   20. counterfeit music, movies, software, or other licensed materials without the appropriate authorization from the rights holder;
   21. products or services that directly infringe or facilitate infringement upon the trademark, patent, copyright, trade secrets, or proprietary or privacy rights of any third party;
   22. the unauthorized sale or resale of brand name or designer products or services;
   23. the sale of goods or services that are illegally imported or exported;
   24. processing, where there is no bona fide donation accepted; cash advance; card testing; evasion of card network chargeback monitoring programs;
   25. the collecting or providing of funds for any purpose other than as described in a Fundraiser description;
   26. any other activity that GoFundMe may deem, in its sole discretion, to be in support of individuals and/or entities associated with alleged financial crimes including but not limited to corruption, bribery, tax evasion, fraud, and activities of a similar nature; or
   27. any other activity that GoFundMe may deem, in its sole discretion, to be unacceptable.

 

Just keep in mind that the point of crowdfunding, has never been for political causes. One of the big points made about what happened in Canada is that more than half the donations came from the US. I'm pretty sure those didn't all come from snowbirds.

 

 

[IPD]

10 hours ago, Kisai said:

Oh gee, a bunch of people waving hate flags among a bunch of others armed with weapons. Looks like terrorism to me.

Blocking access to a city, and blocking access to a border crossing? If that was done by the military that would be an act of war. Terrorizing the residents by making noise constantly, that's the very definition of terrorism.

No you don't. Because then your crowdfunding platform becomes a means of overthrowing democratically elected governments funded by dictatorships in neighboring countries.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.  It all depends on one's point of view.  In a democracy, the point of view of those in power shouldn't factor into that at all.  What should factor in...is the public consensus.

 

Sure, in a perfect world, there's an absolute blockade against foreign interference (financially) in domestic affairs.  But it doesn't take very much to take that and pervert it into domestic suppression.  It's not much different than how the Patriot Act came to be the Big Brother that it currently is.

 

Of course, all of this could go away in a heartbeat if you had leadership willing to listen to the vocal (previously silent) majority.  But instead they are doubling down on portraying their critics as evil incarnate; conflating them with terrorists; and exploring every surreptitious method for underhandedly crushing rebellion.  In that vein, you now have a situation becoming day by day manifestly identical to the regimes of Erdogan, Lukashenko, Berdimuhamedow, etc.

[Unclescar]

13 hours ago, Kisai said:

a bunch of people waving hate flags among a bunch of others armed with weapons

Lol canadian flag is not a hate flag. There is nothing wrong with being armed. I encourage it actually. For everyone. Armed minorities are harder to oppress and victimize. That's the point. Anyone wanting to remove tools of self-defense should be assumed to have bad intentions, especially a government.
 

13 hours ago, Kisai said:

Looks like terrorism to me.

get your eyes checked then.

13 hours ago, Kisai said:

Terrorizing the residents by making noise constantly, that's the very definition of terrorism.

right.. making noise in defiance of authoritarianism is terrorism, but according to the official media narratives of the US and Canada, literally burning down cities, attacking citizens and chanting for the abolishment of the country is just a mostly peaceful protest.

clown world goes Honk Honk

[poochyena]

25 minutes ago, Unclescar said:

Armed minorities are harder to oppress and victimize. That's the point. Anyone wanting to remove tools of self-defense should be assumed to have bad intentions, especially a government.

Why is north america so dangerous that you need to be armed to feel safe?

[WolframaticAlpha]

On 2/17/2022 at 1:25 AM, Sauron said:

The design of crypto has no real advantages over conventional methods

I agree with you on other counts, but the fact that a cryptocurrency is deriving it's value from cryptographic functiona performed by a puter instead of a government with malleable opinions is kinda a major deal.

[Unclescar]

3 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Why is north america so dangerous that you need to be armed to feel safe?

*eyeroll...*

more thoughtless condescension dripping with smugness. Oh the world would be so great if we all just thought like you. Life has been so good you cannot even comprehend why anyone could possibly think differently.

I don't mean to be condescending, I mean to be insulting.
You want people to just accept things and comply. I want people to be left alone. Sometimes the only way to be left alone is to be capable of harming those who would bother you. Capability does not imply intent.

Hypothetically, if your question was sincere (which I know its not, but anyway..) then I would suggest you do some digging into history. legality and morality are not mutually inclusive.

[Sauron]

2 hours ago, WolframaticAlpha said:

I agree with you on other counts, but the fact that a cryptocurrency is deriving it's value from cryptographic functiona performed by a puter instead of a government with malleable opinions is kinda a major deal.

Why? I think it's abundantly clear that the behavior of major holders and transaction verifyiers is just as, if not more, malleable. Governments at least have a vested interest in a stable currency whereas crypto holders want unfettered deflation. As far as I've seen the only """advantage""" this decentralization brought is the ability to more easily evade taxes and buy illegal goods... which isn't exactly a feature in my book. Nobody in countries with an oppressive government has the means to use crypto for anything meaningful anyway, and even if they did the wild deflation would make it unusable for anything other than raw speculation.

[JogerJ]

Without crypto involved, I don't see how this is different than just a government sponsored Paypal system or the balance on your bank statement, but this time 0 fees.

What guarantee is there that the government won't suddenly delete your wallet contents without your say?

[tikker]

2 hours ago, JogerJ said:

What guarantee is there that the government won't suddenly delete your wallet contents without your say?

The same one through which your current bank won't suddenly zero your bank account without your say; either on their own or on government orders.

[IPD]

8 hours ago, poochyena said:

Why is north america so dangerous that you need to be armed to feel safe?

Show me the 100% disarmed country in the world that you feel safe in, and I will probably show you a violent crime rate that makes the USA's look tame by comparison.

 

Again, I will point to Suisse as a classic example of "more guns, more peace".  But you will take note that the USA is not a monolithic block, and crime tends to be clumped into areas where guns are restricted.  Moreover, as you can quickly find on wikipedia, the unregistered firearms in the USA dwarfs the registered firearms by over 300:1.  You aren't "fixing the problem" by going after legal ownership.

[mr moose]

35 minutes ago, IPD said:

Show me the 100% disarmed country in the world that you feel safe in, and I will probably show you a violent crime rate that makes the USA's look tame by comparison.

 

Again, I will point to Suisse as a classic example of "more guns, more peace".  But you will take note that the USA is not a monolithic block, and crime tends to be clumped into areas where guns are restricted.  Moreover, as you can quickly find on wikipedia, the unregistered firearms in the USA dwarfs the registered firearms by over 300:1.  You aren't "fixing the problem" by going after legal ownership.

Gun debates are pointless,  the issue is not "owning guns" or not "not owning" guns, it's simply a sate that exists due to hundreds of years of development in that direction.  It's plainly ridiculous to think that disarming the US will make it safer.  But it is also not good to ignore the fact that when most guns are illegal in a country, that all the illegal guns become an instant arrest matter and not a homicide down the road.  This happens often In Australia as carrying a gun is illegal.  

 

Also trying to compare stats on violent crime is almost pointless as the stat are just not reliable for that.  i.e:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/violent-crime-rates-by-country

 

Do you think Australia has the second highest rate of rapes in the world, or are we just good at supporting victims to come forward?  Juxtaposition Australia to a nation like Iran and tell me they are comparable?  Gun violence is similar.

 

I don't want a gun debate, I just want you to know that your opinions are valid and fine, but others have a different understanding from living in a different world. And as such this thread will just go on and on and on until someone gets tired of responding.   Also logic is hard for some people, all they have is emotional reasoning.

 

[poochyena]

3 hours ago, IPD said:

Show me the 100% disarmed country in the world that you feel safe in, and I will probably show you a violent crime rate that makes the USA's look tame by comparison.

Yea... thats what i'm asking. Why is north america so dangerous that you need to be armed to feel safe?

3 hours ago, IPD said:

crime tends to be clumped into areas where guns are restricted.

Most countries with little crime also have few guns.

3 hours ago, IPD said:

You aren't "fixing the problem" by going after legal ownership.

Where do you think people get guns illegally from, exactly?

[Avocado Diaboli]

5 hours ago, IPD said:

Again, I will point to Suisse as a classic example of "more guns, more peace".

I love how people take my country's rate of gun ownership and equate that with the US. Switzerland's high proliferation of firearms is mostly due to a lot of hunters owning hunting rifles, not random dipshits owning AR-15, and every male person who went through mandatory military service having the right to purchase their service rifle after they're done. We don't own a lot of handguns for example, buying guns ALWAYS comes with background checks and transporting a weapon that isn't a mere hunting rifle or a military rifle with a disassembled gun barrel and 0 ammunition in the magazine is illegal. We also don't tend to see a gun as a tool to solve disputes or a backup TV remote if the real one gets lodged between the couch cushions. 

 

[IPD]

10 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

I love how people take my country's rate of gun ownership and equate that with the US. Switzerland's high proliferation of firearms is mostly due to a lot of hunters owning hunting rifles, not random dipshits owning AR-15, and every male person who went through mandatory military service having the right to purchase their service rifle after they're done. We don't own a lot of handguns for example, buying guns ALWAYS comes with background checks and transporting a weapon that isn't a mere hunting rifle or a military rifle with a disassembled gun barrel and 0 ammunition in the magazine is illegal. We also don't tend to see a gun as a tool to solve disputes or a backup TV remote if the real one gets lodged between the couch cushions. 

 

 

Not disagreeing with that.  I think that prior-service keeping firearms is a great means to encourage responsible ownership in the public at large.  Ya'll are the only place in the world with a highway down the middle of a firing range--which is a testament to the discipline your countrymen possess.

 

We have background checks in the USA too.  It's not some kind of hit-or-miss thing; despite what the media would have you believe.

 

As far as "tool to solve disputes"--well I'm not allowed to comment on subculture in the USA that has caused societal rot; because I'm usually called a bigot for pointing it out.